Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,750   Posts: 1,515,749   Online: 1102
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 22
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Shropshire, UK
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    829
    Images
    7
    Hi, thanks for all the suggestion.

    Tetenal always was available in the UK, years ago. I have bought Tetenal chemistry before, in the past. I doubt it would be very easy to find in a high street stockist (because these days it would be hard to find a high street stockist in the first place...) but I'll give Silverprint a try...

    I have no problem with mixing Beutler's - I have mixed dozen's of developers before and still have a lot of chemicals. The Metol might have oxidised after this time, but I have lots of everything else available. My worry with chemicals is that I quite enjoy it and tend to get engrossed very easily. It is a lot of fun, but I found last time that I tended to neglect other aspects of the hobby - like actually taking some pictures!

    The effect I got with the Acutol that I liked so much was pronounced Mackie lines. I took some figure studies where it almost looked like the model had been cut out of a dark background with a very accurate scalpel and pasted onto a backdrop - real pencil round the edges stuff. I've never managed to achieve this with Rodinal, despite it's reputation for Acutance.
    Steve

  2. #12
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,165
    Images
    148
    Metol keeps well, I have some that's over 40 years old

    Ian

  3. #13
    RobertV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,057
    Well in that case instead of ordering pre-mix I can only recommend Beutler to replace the Acutol.

    Metol keeps very well BTW.

    Solution A:
    1g Metol
    5g Sodiumsulfite (sicc.)

    Fill up till 100ml with demi-water

    Solution B:
    5g Sodiumcarbonate (sicc.) or
    14,6g Household soda (Sodiumcabonate . 10 H2O)

    Fill up till 100ml with demi-water

    Use it 1+1+10 e.g. 25ml A + 25ml B fill up till 250ml
    I do not have FP4+ data available because I am not using Ilford films.

    Three combinations I am using: Acros 100, Efke 25 and Rollei Pan 25 with Beutler.

  4. #14
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Excuse me for butting in, but there is one thing to keep in mind about Mackie Lines. The human eye makes them also. You may see the effect at any sharp edge of high contrast. A high quality magnifier will show that this line will appear to vary in width, or even disappear at a near enough viewing distance. I have one photo in particular that shows this effect.

    A fellow photographer once sent me a photo that he said had this edge effect due to use of Acutol. When I looked at it magnified what I saw was a very sharp edge, but no appreciable Mackie line. However, the unaided eye did see the line.

    All I'm saying is to be sure that the Mackie line you see is in the object and not (at least not all) in your eye.
    Gadget Gainer

  5. #15
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by steven_e007 View Post
    Well, not much anyway. Suitably atired in my hair-shirt, sack cloth and camera bag I am currently carrying three film cameras with me everywhere. That is the beauty of digital, if you dislike it enough it can be really motivating!
    And this, folks, is one of the many reasons I keep coming back to APUG. :-)
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  6. #16
    Matt5791's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    England, Birmingham
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    998
    Images
    17
    I notice that the Film Developing Cookbook (note: the sister publication to the Darkroom cookbook) gives the formula for Acutol S, or FX15 as Crawley dubbed it. When Paterson discontinued it, Crawley published the formula, which is apparently:

    Metol 3.5g
    Sodium Sulphate anhydrous 100g
    Phenidone 0.1g
    Hydroquinone 2.25g
    Sodium Bisulphate 0.5g
    Borax 2.5g
    Sodium corbonate anhydrous 1g
    Potassium Bromide 1.5g
    Water to make 1L

    Maybe someone can confim this.

    Matt

  7. #17
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,165
    Images
    148
    There's another thread about Crawley developers and Acutol-S at the moment. It's a different developer and gives much more pronounced acutance and edge effects compared to Acutol but at the expense of grain & tonality.

    All Paterson developers have an FX number, Acutol is FX-14 and hasn't yet been published, presumably because it could be re-introduced.

    Ian

  8. #18
    gainer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3,726
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Grant View Post
    Metol keeps well, I have some that's over 40 years old

    Ian
    How do you tell if the Metol is only, say, 10% oxidized when the first thing you mix with it is sulfite? The oxidized Metol is converted to the sulfonate, from what I have read, which is somewhat weaker than metol, but better than oxidized Metol which is an inhibitor of development, or so I have read. If in fact sodium ascorbate will regenerate oxidized Metol, as I have read, why not add some to the Metol solution before adding the sulfite and hydroquinone of D-76? In fact, why not substitute 8 g. of sodium ascorbate in place of the 5 g. of Q?

    Just curious.
    Gadget Gainer

  9. #19
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,165
    Images
    148
    Usually I forget to add the pinch of Sulphite so if the Metol was partially oxidised I'd see that from the colour as it dissolves. The old Metol I've got (a few KG) works as well as the fresh Metol I also have so I don't think there's a problem. In truth I now mainly use Phenidone based developers as they have better keeping properties, maybe it's time I off-loaded some of the Metol & the few Kg of Pyrogallol

    I'm loathe to tamper with a formula, so unless I'm adapting or designing a new one for a specific purpose I wouldn't put ascorbate in. Ascorbate/Ascorbic acid & derivative based developers have been around for a long time, they are in Kodak (1947) & Ilford (56 & 57) patents, unfortunately the Patents probably aren't available online, the Kodak Rather one is French & the Ilford one British. (I only just found the referances a few minutes ago).

    I think what surprises me is just how much work was done on developers using Ascorbates and how until Xtol most of us didn't contemplate using it. There's a Swedish company who patented (USP) an Xtol style developer in the 60's so nothings that new.

    Ian

  10. #20
    semeuse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Treasure Coast, FL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    462
    Images
    98
    someone else here already suggested Prescysol - with semi-stand development, I have found the same effects you are describing with Acutol - you may wish to give it a try

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin